Teams advantage Ancient (M1)
Lineups
Lineup
Starter
Starter
Starter
Starter
Starter
Lineup
Starter
Starter
Starter
Starter
Starter
Historical Maps winrate Last 6 months
Dust II
100%
Vertigo
50%
Ancient
22%
Nuke
20%
Mirage
9%
Inferno
6%
Anubis
1%
Last 5 maps
Dust II
100%
1
17
Vertigo
50%
10
4
Ancient
58%
64
0
Nuke
58%
24
5
Mirage
59%
41
1
Inferno
54%
13
9
Anubis
54%
24
2
Last 5 maps
Dust II
0%
2
2
Vertigo
0%
1
18
Ancient
36%
11
3
Nuke
38%
8
7
Mirage
50%
12
3
Inferno
60%
5
6
Anubis
55%
11
3
Last results
Head to head
Past matches
- wwlww
- wlwww
Info
Map Analysis of CPH Wolves vs 500 by the Bo3.gg Team
500 on Ancient Analysis
500 demonstrated their prowers on Ancient, securing 13 out of 22 rounds, showcasing their ability to control and adapt to various situations on this specific map. Victory on this map contributed to their overall success in the match.
The standout players for 500 on Ancient were Rainwaker, who contributed 20 kills, and CeRq, who added 18 kills to the team's efforts. Their exceptional skills and coordination were instrumental in securing the map win. Throughout the match on Ancient, the team inflicted a total of 9762 overall damage.
On the defensive side of Ancient, 500 held their ground firmly, successfully defending 6 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination and site control on this map proved to be crucial in their victory.
CPH Wolves on Ancient Analysis
Ancient proved to be a challenging battleground for CPH Wolves, as they managed to secure 9 out of 22 rounds on this map. Adapting to their opponent's strategies on this particular map presented difficulties for them.
The standout players for CPH Wolves on Ancient included sense, who contributed 11 kills, and BøghmagiC, who added 12 kills. Despite their individual efforts, inflicting 7925 total damage, CPH Wolves couldn't prevent 500 from securing victory on Ancient
On the defensive side of Ancient, CPH Wolves struggled to hold their ground, successfully defending 3 bomb plants. Their defensive coordination faced challenges on this map, making it difficult to maintain site control.
0 Comments